am-software-solutions

Unfortunately not, but would that cause any problems? I thought `emplace_or_replace` would ignore the case when there is a component already present...

```cpp if(!reg.try_get(ent)) { reg.emplace_or_replace(ent, 123); reg.emplace_or_replace(ent, SOME_STATIC_STRING); } ``` ok, really strange, that crashes still on the Component emplace call, so now I'm out of ideas...

Hmm, I already checked that, only one thread calls the code and there is no move done (singleton registry)... Is there any reason why the assert is not in this...

> The assert tells you that the slot is already taken. It means that the set already contains the entity. That's all. The component type doesn't really matter too, it...

> Try looking into EnTT documentation about working with shared libraries. If you don't do things properly, then each shared library will have it's own set of identifiers for components...

> Just FYI, I had the exact same assertion when emplacing a component after previously accessing the same type of component from a deleted entity (Which of course is wrong)....

It's your baby :), you can judge best, but asserting asap sounds good to me.